network operations centers - redes de computadores e ...penta2.ufrgs.br/tutorials/qos/noc01.pdf ·...

1 Highlights

2 About Lucent TechnologiesWorldwide Services

2 About Lucent Worldwide ServicesNetwork Industry Surveys

3 Introduction

3 The Bottom Line

4 NOC Profile

7 Measuring and ImprovingNetwork Operations

11 Managing NOCs: Metrics and Tools

14 NOC Outsourcing and Out-tasking

16 NOC Demographics

18 Respondent Demographics

19 Respondent Comments

20 Methodology

CONTENTS

N e t w o r k I n d u s t r y S u r v e y

E Lack of experienced staff is most

frequently a significant barrier

to improving NOC capabilities,

a concern of 56% of respon-

dents. For 47% of respondents,

justifying costs/benefits to upper

management is also a significant

barrier, a 15% increase from last

year.

E While the cost of outsourcing or

out-tasking network operations

is most frequently a barrier to

implementing these strategies,

lack of solutions providers with

multivendor skills is often a

significant barrier for both out-

sourcing respondents (57%) and

out-tasking respondents (49%).

E Ensuring that effective process-

es/procedures are in place is

increasingly important for a

successful network management

operation, especially for organi-

zations that support 2,000 or

more network elements.

E Less than one-fifth of respon-

dents are completely satisfied

with their network operations

performance in each of the

FCAPS categories, with security

having the biggest gap between

overall satisfaction and importance.

E Ensuring NOC staffs possess the

appropriate skills is the most

important task for optimizing

network operations (this is

critical for 57% of respondents).

E Continuing an upward trend,

83% of networking organiza-

tions are achieving some level of

integration in the management

of their network and systems

operations. 24% have achieved

a totally integrated strategy.

E In keeping with past survey

trends, 85% of respondents

consider the NOC a critical

component of an integrated

enterprise management center.

HIGHL IGHTS

Network Operations CentersBy Rick Blum, Senior Research Programs Manager

January 22, 20012 Lucent Technologies

NETWORK OPERAT IO N S CEN TERS

For further information regarding this survey, please contact:

Rick Blum

Senior Research Programs Manager

(781) 848-5500, Ext. 320,

E-mail: [email protected]

ABOUT LUCENT

TECHNOLOGIES

WORLDWIDE SERVICES

Lucent Technologies Worldwide Services is a global provider of network consulting and

software solutions for the full lifecycle of a network, including planning and design,

implementation and operations, as well as sustaining services like management and

maintenance. We maintain expertise in the most complex network technologies and

multivendor environments. Through our VitalSoft division, Lucent offers industry-

leading software solutions for managing and optimizing application-ready networks.

Lucent Technologies is headquartered in Murray Hill, New Jersey, USA. Visit the

Lucent Worldwide Services web site at http://www.lucentservices.com.

Lucent Worldwide Services conducts monthly industry survey projects intended to

provide IT managers with insight into key issues impacting the ability to develop and

deploy network-centric business applications. Previous survey reports include:

E Performance Management and Engineering

E Network Quality of Service

E ASP Network Infrastructure

E Service Level Management

E Network Security

E Convergence and New World Services Providers

E E-Business Network Architecture/Infrastructure

E Network Professionals Job Satisfaction

E Network and Systems Management Total Cost of Ownership

E Networking in the 21st Century

E Virtual Private Networks

E Network Operations Centers

E Enterprise Operating Systems and Directory Services

E Management Intranets

E Network Prospects for the New Millennium

E Web/Java-based Management

E Remote Access Services

To see the results of these surveys or to participate in the latest Lucent network

industry survey, log on to our web site at:

http://www.lucentservices.com/surveys

If you would like to learn how Lucent Worldwide Services can help you implement or

improve your networking capabilities, please call us at 1-888-4-LUCENT in the U.S., or

1-650-318-1020 outside the U.S., or email: [email protected].

ABOUT LUCENT WORLDWIDE

SERVICES NETWORK

INDUSTRY SURVEYS

NETWORK OPERAT I ONS CE NT E R S

3January 22, 2001 Lucent Technologies

Introduction

The network operations center (NOC)

plays a central role in today’s multiven-

dor distributed networks by helping

network engineers keep track of the

performance, reliability and stability

of the entire network. With the continual

increase in the importance that network-

ing plays in the success of the core

business, effective NOC management

is vital.

In November 2000, Lucent

Technologies Worldwide Services

conducted a Web-based survey to assess

current and future capabilities of NOCs

worldwide. The results of this survey,

which was completed by 175 network

professionals, render valuable insights

into their current and planned strategies

for the successful operation of their

NOCs, as well as identify some of

the barriers to improving network

operations.

In this fourth annual survey of

network operations center activities,

we will compare results with previous

surveys to assess how respondents’

perceptions have changed, how NOC

usage is evolving, and identify significant

industry trends. These results will enable

networking organizations to better

understand how their operations

compare with other NOCs, and where

they might find areas for improvement.

Complete survey results are available at

www.lucentservices.com/surveys.

For the purposes of this survey, a

NOC is defined as a combination of orga-

nizational structures, staffing, processes,

technology products and tools, and

service providers designed to provide

reliable operational service levels to end

users of multivendor, heterogeneous,

distributed networks. Many organiza-

tions incorporate their NOC(s) into a

broader enterprise management center.

THE BOT TOM LINE

Today many businesses must operate their networks in a mul-

titechnology, multivendor environment that is increasingly

costly and complex to operate and manage. As core business

functions rely increasingly on networks for communications

and delivery of critical data, network management strategy is

driven by the need to minimize network failure, improve ser-

vice quality, reduce operating costs, and enable new business

opportunities.

Keeping the network running efficiently at all times, espe-

cially during periods of rapid expansion, requires being able to

assemble a team of network professionals with the necessary

technical skills, establish processes and polices to control

the activity, and provide skillful management of the entire

operation. Managers responsible for network operations

must consider the following:

E The most formidable challenge for most organizations is

to hire, train, and retain a cadre of highly skilled network

professionals who can make sense of the many-faceted

elements of a modern enterprise network. A focus on

these goals may be more important to success than good

technology.

E Outsourcing and/or out-tasking offer relief from the staffing

and skills dilemma, allowing organizations to attain instant

network expertise for maximizing network performance,

and help with critical functions, such as security.

E Pay careful attention to processes and procedures that can

maximize the value of the network management technolo-

gies you deploy. As you grow your NOC capabilities, be

sure to keep the future in mind, knowing that you’ll have

to integrate new technologies and services into your NOC,

thus requiring adaptation of staffing requirements and

organizational adjustments.



NOC Profile

Surveys of network operations centers

over the past four years have shown a

clear trend toward more integration of

the management of network operations

and systems operations. This year 83%

of networking organizations report

achieving some level of integration.

This is up from 66% reported in 1998.

Most significantly, the percentage

of organizations achieving a totally

integrated strategy has jumped from

14% in previous years to 24% today.

Moreover, this year shows a decrease

in both the percentages of respondents

who have partially integrated manage-

ment of network and systems

operations and those who have

totally separated these functions.

Among respondents who currently

have a NOC, a single centralized center

remains the most common configura-

tion, although the percentage of

respondents whose NOC is organized

in this way has dropped substantially

from 53% last year and 56% in 1998 to

only 39% this year. The percentage of

respondent organizations with multiple

local/regional centers with integration at

a centralized site has fluctuated over

the four years the surveys have been

conducted, but remains the primary

alternative to a single, centralized center.

For other NOC configurations the results

remain about the same as for the past

several surveys.

Wide-area network (WAN) and

local-area network (LAN) services

continue to be those services most

frequently offered by respondents’

NOCs. This year, eight out of ten

NOCs supported these services. This

percentage has not changed significantly

over the last four surveys, nor is it

expected to increase significantly in

the coming year.

Server services (offered by three-

fourths of respondents) continue its

moderate yearly growth in usage from

1998 through 2001. Desktop services

and traditional voice services (both

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Integration Level for Networks and Systems

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents

Totally integrated management of all networks and systems

Partially integrated management of all networks and systems

Totally separate management of networks and systems

1998 1999 2000 2001

14 14 1424

5264 64

59

17222234

N=174



offered by well over half of respon-

dents) have continued their significant

upward trend in usage and will soon

be supported by nearly two-thirds of

respondent organizations.

The greatest anticipated changes in

NOC services are expected to be in sup-

port of two relatively new technologies:

voice over IP (VoIP) and virtual private

networks (VPNs). Support for VoIP was

essentially unchanged from last year’s

survey, which indicates that this tech-

nology has yet to catch on with most

organizations. However, the year ahead

promises significant changes, with over

half of the respondents indicating they

plan to have this capability within 12

months. VPN services display a steadier

growth rate, increasing from 33% of

respondent NOCs last year, to 44% this

year, to more than three-fourths in the

year ahead.

Managed security, a new service

added to this year’s survey, is currently

offered by 53% of respondents and is

expected to increase to 68% utilization

within 12 months. This is a clear reflec-

tion of security concerns taking center

stage in various e-business transactions.

NOC Organizational Structure

Multiple local/regional operations centers with no integration

Multiple local/regional centers with integration at a centralized site

Single centralized center

1998 1999 2000 2001

N=160

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Multiple centralized centers, integrated for follow-the-sun coverage

Other

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents

Percent of respondents

NOC Services Offered

Within 12 monthsCurrentN=144

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

79

80

70

44

53

56

59

21

8

6

8

33

15

10

6

35

WAN

LAN

Server

VPN

Managed security

Traditional voice

Desktop

Voice over IP

Server services

continue its moderate

yearly growth

in usage from 1998

through 2001.


In addition to these basic services,

respondents listed a multitude of other

more specialized services that they offer

including videoconferencing, colocation,

and Internet access. In the coming year,

some respondents will be adding new

services for customized portals and uni-

fied messaging, among many others.

Enterprises are increasingly creating

integrated enterprise management

centers, which combine their NOCs

with other support organizations such

as help desk, customer service center,

data center, and desktop support. In

keeping with past surveys that show

80-90% of respondents consider the

NOC as a critical component of an

integrated center, currently 85% hold

this view. Additionally, help desk is

viewed by 72% of respondents as a

critical component.

Although most of the other

components are considered important

by about the same percentage of

respondents as in previous years, there

was an increase (from 54% last year

to 65% this year) in the percentage of

respondents who believe the data center

is vital to an integrated support strategy.

Whether this indicates the start of a

trend remains to be seen.


N=169

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

NOC Help desk Data center Customer service center

Desktopsupport

Components Considered Vital to an Integrated EnterpriseManagement Center

85

65

72

5047

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Changes in NOC Services Offered

WAN

LAN

Server

Managed security

VPNTraditional voice

Desktop

Voice over IP



Measuring andImproving NetworkOperations

Ensuring NOC staff possess appropriate

skills, and have established effective

processes and procedures are regarded as

the most important tasks for optimizing

network operations. These tasks are

considered critically important by 57%

and 42% of respondents, respectively.

Two other tasks, using tools effectively

and having an effective organization

structure, are also deemed important

by a large percentage of respondents.

Although all four of these tasks maintain

high importance across the last three

surveys, respondents in this year’s

survey indicate that ensuring effective

processes and procedures are in place

has become even more important to

successful network management.

As networks become larger and

involve more elements to be managed,

having effective processes and proce-

dures gain significantly in importance.

Respondents whose networks support

2,000 or more elements rated effective

processes and procedures substantially

higher in importance than did respon-

dents with smaller networks. Half of the

former group deems these characteristics

critical, while only one-third of the latter

group agree with this assessment.

Rating the importance of various

tasks for optimizing network operations

is one thing; satisfaction with these tasks

is quite another issue.

Respondents exhibited only luke-

warm satisfaction with the way these

tasks actually played out in their net-

work operations. As a result, no compo-

nent received a "completely satisfied"

rating by more than 14% of respon-

dents. The most dissatisfaction lies with

effective processes and procedures,

whereby 22% of respondents say they

are completely dissatisfied. Although

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

4.64.2

4.5

4.34.24.2

4.04.0

4.2

4.33.8

3.9

3.53.5

3.33.4

Ensuring NOC staff have appropriate skills

Using tools effectively

Effective processes/procedures

Effective organization structure

Leveraging external skills/resources

Utilizing vendor/service provider NOC services

N/A

N/A

Importance of Tasks for Optimizing Network Operations

1999 2000 2001

Not at allimportant

Not soimportant

Fairlyimportant

Veryimportant

Critical

N=141



the changes in satisfaction from 1999 to

2001 are not dramatic, the good news is

that overall they are at least heading in

the right direction.

In spite of the less than enthusiastic

expression of satisfaction with various

aspects of network operations, the small

improvement in satisfaction and minimal

change in importance means that the

gap between importance and satisfaction

(of the four network operations sur-

veyed in 1998), has narrowed slightly

over the past three years, from an aver-

age gap of 1.0 in 1998 to 0.7 in 2001.

The small upticks in several cate-

gories (staffing NOC with appropriate

skills, effective processes and procedures,

and utilizing vendor/service provider

NOC services) have more than offset the

narrowing gap for using tools effectively,

effective organization structure, and

leveraging external skills and resources.

Still, it will take at least another year of

data to confirm these trends.

A multitude of concerns can hinder

organizations in their efforts to improve

NOC capabilities and performance, as

indicated by the relatively high (slightly

less than five) average number of signifi-

cant barriers selected by respondents

from a list of 14. Leading all other issues,

lack of experienced staff is tagged by

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Satisfaction with Tasks Required for Optimizing �Network Operations

3.53.5

3.6

3.23.4

3.6

3.33.5

3.03.2

3.5

3.03.3

3.4

3.43.3







Completelydissatisfied

Somewhatdissatisfied

Neither satisfiednor dissatisfied

Somewhatsatisfied

Completelysatisfied

1999 2000 2001N=141

N/A

N/A

3.0

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4.0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.8

5.0

Correlation Between Network Size and Importance ofEffective Processes/Procedures

<500 500-999 2,000-14,999 15,000+

Number of Elements Managed

Imp

ort

an

ce

ra

tin

g



56% of respondents (same as last year)

as a significant barrier to improving NOC

capabilities. Organizational and process

issues and inadequate training available

exacerbate this staffing problem for more

than one-third of respondents each. For

another 28%, excessive staff turnover is

a significant barrier.

In addition to staffing and organiza-

tional matters, several technological con-

cerns continue to be significant barriers

to improving NOC capabilities. These

include lack of products/tools, difficulty

in implementing products/tools (both

cited by 40% of respondents), available

products and tools that don’t meet

requirements and the lack of metrics

(both cited by one-third of respondents).

As if technological and staffing/

organizational challenges weren’t

enough, 47% of respondents mentioned

justifying costs/benefits to upper

management as significant barriers to

improving NOC capabilities. In fact,

this barrier has become much more

prevalent this year with a 15% increase

from last year. This change, perhaps,

is an indicator of increased scrutiny of

budgets in an uncertain economy.

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2







Dif

fere

nce

bet

wee

n im

ort

ance

an

d s

atis

fact

ion

rat

ing

s

Gap Between Network Operations Importance and Satisfaction

1999 2000 2001

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

56

47

45

40

40

37

36

33

33

30

28

28

13

5

Lack of experienced staff

Justifying costs/benefits to upper management

Cost of products/tools too high

Lack of products/tools

Difficulty in implementing products/tools

Inadequate training available

Organizational/process issues

Available products/tools don't meet requirements

Lack of metrics

Lack of SLAs

Other projects with higher priority

Excessive staff turnover

Lack of proven business benefit

Other

Significant Barriers to Improving NOC Capabilities

Percent of respondentsN=141

A multitude of concerns

can hinder organizations

in their efforts to

improve NOC capabilities

and performance...



Other substantial increases to NOC

improvement barriers since last year’s

survey come from two areas that were

previously not near the top of the list.

The high cost of products and tools is

now considered a significant barrier to

45% of respondents (17% increase),

with the lack of products and tools now

being considered a significant barrier

to 40% of respondents (15% increase).

This is a clarion call to product and

tools vendors that the bar has been

raised.

With lack of experienced staff

being the most prominent barrier to

improved NOC operations, we asked

what factors have the greatest impact

on staffing the NOC. Not surprisingly,

respondents indicate that recruiting,

training, and retaining skilled network

professionals together comprise over

60% of this challenge. Recruitment of

skilled network professionals is most

significant; as cited by 28% of respon-

dents, followed closely by the challenge

of retaining these people once they are

on board.

Also impacting staffing efforts is

the complexity of the technological

environment supported by the NOC

(18%) as well as the implementation/

administration of new technologies

(16% of total challenge). Of the many

other reasons cited by respondents,

funding and budgetary constraints

are mentioned most often as having

impacted staffing of NOCs.

Factor Having Greatest Impact on Staffing NOC

N=145

18%5% Other

Complexity of thetechnologicalenvironment

supported

16%Implementation/administration of

new technologies

28%Challenge of recruiting skillednetwork professionals

21% Challenge of retainingskilled network staff

12% Challenge of trainingnetwork staff

N=141

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

17

15 15

98

Cost of products/

tools too high

Lack ofproducts/tools

Justifying �costs/

benefitsto upper

management

Inadequatetraining

available

Lack ofmetrics

Biggest Increases to NOC Barriers, 2000 to 2001

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents



Managing NOCs:Metrics and Tools

Like the previous three years, network

performance, availability and customer

satisfaction are the most frequently

employed metrics used to manage NOC

effectiveness. Although last year there

had been some signs of a possible shift

away from these metrics, this was

apparently an aberration since the

percentages for this year are much the

same as for the previous two years. Cost

of services (total cost of ownership) as

a metric for NOC effectiveness showed

the greatest rise in usage, climbing from

22% of respondents last year to 34%

of respondents this year.

The typical respondent uses four

metrics to measure the effectiveness of

their NOC, with nearly all employing

two of the top three measures, i.e.,

network performance, availability and

customer satisfaction.

For four of the five FCAPS tool

types, usage by respondents in this

year’s survey is slightly higher than the

average usage of the past three survey

years. Accounting tools, the notable

exception, show a marked increase in

usage by respondents. A notable 53%

of respondents today versus an average

of 33% over the past three years.

Additionally, 76% of respondents say

they will use accounting tools within

the next 12 months, resulting in a sub-

stantially increased emphasis on these

tools in just a couple of years.

Fault detection, performance, and

configuration tools will also show sub-

stantial increases in usage over the next

12 months. Somewhat surprisingly,

however, despite the spotlight that

has shone on security issues in 2000,

planned usage of security tools in NOCs

will show a marginal increase, with

more than one-quarter of respondents’

NOCs still not using these tools today

or in the coming 12 months.

The most rapid growth in tool

usage in the year ahead is reserved for

asset verification. An astounding one-

third of respondents plan to add this

tool to their NOC tool kit in the year

ahead.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

7458

72

7052

64

6151

63

403637

4229

37

2622

34

3735

34

2925

24

2319

22

213

5

Network performance

Availability

Customer satisfaction

Ticket volume

Mean-time-to-repair (MTTR)

Cost of services (total cost of ownership)

Call volume

Call answering delay

Blocked/dropped calls

Other


Metrics Used to Manage NOC Effectiveness

200120001999 N=145



Interestingly, the importance of

every tool type of the FCAPS (fault

detection, configuration, accounting,

performance, and security) model used

in NOCs has increased in this year’s

survey, as compared to the average

importance rating on the last three

surveys. Fault detection tools continue

to be viewed as most important for

optimizing network operations, and are

considered critically important by 65%

of respondents. Security tools are con-

sidered critically important by more

than half of respondents.

Accounting, which last year was

viewed as critically important by only

8% of respondents, is gaining in overall

importance. This year, it is considered

critically important for optimizing net-

work operations by 14% of respon-

dents. Overall, accounting showed the

largest increase in importance rating

among the five FCAPS categories.

Asset verification tools, a new cate-

gory in the survey this year, is consid-

ered to be critically important by 14%

of respondents, and overall rates nearly

as important as accounting tools.

Generally, as compared to the aver-

age satisfaction ratings from 1998, 1999,

and 2000 surveys, there has been an

increase in satisfaction with network

operations in all FCAPS categories. In

fact, in all five categories, satisfaction

levels in 2001 were equal to (fault

detection and security) or higher than

(configuration, performance, and

0

20

40

60

80

100

Tool Types Used in NOCs

2001Avg. 1998-2000N=144

Faultdetection

Performance Configuration Accounting Assetverification

2002

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents

86 87

97

7881

93

73

81

90

33

53

76

6671

74

40

74

N/A

Security

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

4.4 4.5

4.0

4.34.1

4.3

3.73.9

2.9

3.4 3.3

N/A

Importance of Tools for Optimizing Network Operations

2001Avg. 1998-2000N=144

Faultdetection

Security Performance Configuration Accounting Assetverification

Critical

Veryimportant

Fairlyimportant

Not soimportant

Not at allimportant

accounting) levels in the 2000 survey.

Configuration shows the largest gain in

satisfaction by respondents compared

to 1998, when it garnered only a 2.9

satisfaction rating.

While increased overall satisfaction

is the good news; there is still a long

way to go. Less than 20% of respon-

dents are completely satisfied with any

of the tool types discussed.

Compared with last year’s results,

this year’s survey shows there has

been no significant change in the gap

between the importance respondent’s

place on most tools and their satisfac-

tion with network operations in the

equivalent category. This is said with the

exception of accounting tools, which

went from a 0.3 higher satisfaction rat-

ing than importance rating to equal rat-

ings for both.

Over the past three years, the gap

between importance and satisfaction for

configuration tools has closed by the

greatest amount, principally because

satisfaction has risen faster than impor-

tance for this category. Security remains

an issue as increased exposure of net-

works place greater emphasis on the

importance of high security. Satisfaction

with network operations security is not

increasing fast enough to close the gap

between them. Undoubtedly, this is

related to the fact that more than one-

quarter of respondents are not currently

utilizing security tools.



1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

3.63.8

3.3

3.8

3.4

3.8

3.33.5

3.0

3.43.2

N/A

Satisfaction with Network Operations

2001Avg. 1998-2000N=143

Faultdetection

Configuration Performance Security Accounting Assetverification

Completelysatisfied

Somewhatsatisfied

Neithersatisfied nordissatisfied

Somewhatdissatisfied

Completelydissatisfied

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2Fault detection

Performance

Security

Configuration

Asset verification

1998 1999 2000 2001

Gap Between Tool Importance and Satisfaction �with Network Operations

Accounting

Dif

fere

nce

bet

wee

n im

po

rtan

ce a

nd

sat

isfa

ctio

n r

atin

gs

NOC Outsourcingand Out-tasking

Similar to previous surveys, approxi-

mately half of respondents have

currently either outsourced their net-

work operations (including security),

out-tasked selected network activities, or

are considering one of these alternatives.

Also consistent over the past three years

is the expressed preference, by a wide

margin, for out-tasking selected network

functions rather than outsourcing all

network operations. This year, more

than four times as many organizations

are out-tasking some network opera-

tions as opposed to outsourcing their

entire network. However, the percent-

age of respondents considering each of

these options is about the same.

We asked respondents who current-

ly outsource or out-task their network

operations, or are considering doing so,

which types of service providers they

either use or are considering for use.

Between 36 – 44% of out-tasking

respondents generally consider four

types of providers for use. These types

of providers are network and IT equip-

ment vendors, systems integrators,

and managed service providers (MSPs).

However, outsourcing respondents

are much more likely to look to network

equipment vendors and systems integra-

tors for outside help than to other types

of vendors. Network equipment vendors



0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Outsource all network operations

Out-task selected network operations functions

Not considering outsourcing or out-tasking network operations

View of Network Operations Outsourcing and Out-tasking

6 9

28 8

49

Currently implemented Would consider


N=168

Types of Providers Currently Used or Considering forOutsourcing or Out-tasking

Outsourcing Out-tasking

N=59 (respondents currently out-tasking or considering out-tasking)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

N=23 (respondents currently outsourcing or considering outsourcing)

Networkequipment

vendor

Systemsintegrator

Networkservice provider

Managedservices

provider (MSP)

IT equipmentvendor

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents

61

44

61

36

43

22

3942

26

39...more than four times

as many organizations

are out-tasking some

network operations...

and systems integrators are more likely

to be considered by people who are

outsourcing than they are by people

who are out-tasking.

Out-tasking respondents are more

likely to look to an MSP as opposed to a

network services provider, whereas out-

sourcing respondent’s look to network

services providers just as often as MSPs.

On the average, respondents who

outsource will consider more providers

types (2.3 choices) than respondents

who out-task (1.8 choices).

We further asked respondents who

are either outsourcing or out-tasking all

or part of their networking operations,

or are considering doing so, to identify

significant barriers to this strategy.

Both outsourcing respondents

(61%) and out-tasking respondents

(53%) say most often that a significant

barrier to assigning network operations

to an external service provider is that the

service is too expensive. Both also agree

that lack of solutions providers with

multivendor skills is a frequent barrier to

outsourcing or out-tasking. In fact, both

types of respondents view this factor as

a barrier more frequently today than last

year (49% of out-tasking respondents in

this survey vs. 37% of respondents last

year; and 57% of outsourcing respon-

dents in this survey vs. 43% last year).

Outsourcing respondents more

often consider insufficient service level

commitments, lack of shared manage-

ment solutions, and lack of global

operational coverage as a significant

barrier than do out-tasking respondents.

Interestingly, outsourcing respondents

mentioned an average of 4.2 barriers

to outsourcing, while out-tasking

respondents cited an average of only 3.0

barriers. Clearly, outsourcing presents

more hurdles than does out-tasking.

In our last survey, lack of service

provider capabilities was the number

one hindrance to implementing an

outsourcing strategy. However, in this

survey that factor, although still fre-

quently cited as a significant barrier, is

ranked much farther down the list,

declining by 19%. Global operational

coverage also declined (by 15%) as

compared to last year.



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Service too expensive

Lack of solutions providers with multivendor skills

Insufficient service level commitments

Lack of shared management solutions

Network operations viewed as too critical

Lack of service provider capabilities

Lack of global operational coverage

Justifying costs/benefits to upper management

6153

5749

5727

5231

4836

4831

3922

3951

Significant Barriers to Outsourcing or Out-TaskingNetwork Operations


Out-tasking Outsourcing

N=23 (respondents currently outsourcing or considering outsourcing)N=45 (respondents currently out-tasking or considering out-tasking)



NOC Demographics

More than two-thirds of respondents

who participated in this survey operate

their NOCs on an around-the-clock (24

x 7) schedule. Less than one-quarter

follow a five day, eight hour per day

(5 x 8) schedule. Other schedules

include 5 x 16, 5 x 24, 7 x 8, and 7 x 12.

In this survey, respondents repre-

sent a wide range of network capabilities

in terms of number of network elements

managed. While 30% of respondents

manage less than 500 network elements,

35% manage 5,000 or more elements.

On average, respondents manage

approximately 6,700 network elements

from their NOCs.

Another way to view NOC size is

by the number of full-time equivalents

(FTEs) employed in managing NOC

activities. Although the average NOC is

managing fewer elements this year than

last, they employ more FTEs this year

(27) on average than last year (26).

Also, 34% of respondents employ less

than 5 FTEs, an increase of over 28%

from respondents in last year’s survey.

In the larger shops, there appears to be

little change in the number of FTEs

engaged in NOC activities.

NOC Operating Hours

N=145

69%

8%

23%

Other

5 x 8

7 x 24

30%

20%

Less than 500

500-999

1,000-1,999

15%

13%

5,000-14,999

2,000-4,999

15,000-29,999

30,000 or more5%

10%

7%

Number of Elements Managed by NOCs

N=144

On average,

respondents manage

approximately 6,700

network elements

from their NOCs.



Confirming the expectations

expressed in last year’s survey, the aver-

age NOC staff size grew over the last

year. This trend is likely to continue into

the year ahead. Although the percent-

ages did reflect a slightly more pes-

simistic view last year, on the whole the

numbers for anticipated changes in NOC

staffing echo a similar theme over the

past three surveys. Virtually identical to

two years ago, this year 63% of respon-

dents expect to increase the size of their

staff in the next 12 months, while 31%

of respondents anticipate staffing will

remain at current levels.

34%

10%

Less than 5

5-9 17%

25-49

10-24

50-99

100 or more10%

7%

22%

Number of FTEs Engaged in NOC Activities

N=144

Anticipated Change in Network Operations Staffing

Per

cen

t o

f re

spo

nd

ents

DecreaseStay the sameIncrease

1999 2000 2001

N=144

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1006 9 6

3134

30

6457 63

63%of respondents

expect to increase

the size of their staff in

the next 12 months...



RespondentDemographics

The largest percentage of survey

responses came from North America

(67%). Compared with last year’s

survey, there was an increase in the per-

centage of responses from both Europe

(14% this year vs. 10% last year) and

Asia (12% this year vs. 8% last year).

Survey respondents come from a

wide variety of end-user organizations

(59%), with the remainder of respon-

dents identified as telecom/computer

services providers (41%). The largest

end-user group represented in the

survey is the combined category of

government/education/non-profit (14%

of respondents), followed by financial

services/insurance/legal firms (9% of

respondents) and telecom/computer

hardware/software manufacturers (9%).

Earlier we noted the smaller average

number of network elements supported

and the higher percentage of respon-

dents saying they employ less than 5

FTEs. Reflecting this concentration on

the smaller end, 45% of respondents

report having a data networking budget

of less than $3 million (vs. 39% of

respondents last year).

RespondentsÕ Location

N=172

67%

12%

5%

Asia

South or CentralAmerica

North America

2%Other

14% Europe

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Telecom/computer services provider

Government/Education/Non-profit

Financial Services/Insurance/Legal

Telecom/computer manufacturer (hardware/software)

Retail/Wholesale

Healthcare

Energy/Mining

Manufacturing/Pharmaceuticals

Transportation

Other

RespondentsÕ Industry

N=171Percent of respondents

41

14

9

9

4

4

4

4

1

10

RespondentsÕ CompaniesÕ Data Networking Budget

N=138

45%

14%

17%

Over $50 million

$3 million - $9.9 million

Less than $3 million12% $25 million -$50 million

12% $10 million -$24.9 million

The largest end-user

group represented

in the survey is the

combined category of

government/education/

non-profit. . .



Although the largest percentage

of respondents identified themselves

as network/systems engineers (28%),

management personnel were also repre-

sented strongly (23% manager/director,

and 9% executive level, including VP

and CIO titles).

RespondentsÕ Job Title/Function

N=170

23%

10%

28%

IT Consultant

Network/Systems Engineer

IT Manager/Director

9%IT Executive (VP, CIO, etc.)

11% Other Technical Staff

13%Network Administrator

6% Other

Respondent Comments

E In my opinion, the term ‘Network

Operations Center’ is outdated. I

believe the term ‘Service Management

Center’ is far more appropriate. Our

job is to manage services, not simply

network components. SMC is cus-

tomer-centric, developing a culture

and mindset that is required to

deliver QoS. As telecommunications

is the key enabler for business today,

the customer is only interested in

end-to-end service levels and not

individual router availability. The

SMC places a business focus on the IT.

E NMS utilized in the NOC must be

capable of rapidly diagnosing and,

through artificial intelligence,

directing the entire recovery process

to meet QoS commitments.

E The NOC is the window to the world.

A well run NOC will ensure customer

satisfaction and network reliability.

E Networking is the means in achieving

our ends in centralizing data process-

ing with telephone integration. Basic

tools and equipment are refined

enough for normal, lower perfor-

mance and security-oriented processes.

Only when challenged with more than

networking do we find difficulties in

getting proper support and tools.

E We have a fairly unique circumstance

in that our operations involve highly

critical, confidential, and financially

volatile market information that miti-

gates against outsourcing, while our

actual data and netcenter operations

would benefit from an outsourcing

solution. What we have done, essen-

tially, is to create in-house outsourcing,

in which one division of our company

is an outsourcer and supplier to a

single customer, who is in turn a

source of market tools for a wider

consumer base.

E We have identified a great need for

”must-have“ tools and employees,

but have no budget to implement the

expansion of quality improvements.

E Staffing issues are chronic and

persistent, and will probably continue

into the future.

E I have been a network control techni-

cian for about 18 months and think

operation network service should

have more up-to-date classes for

technicians on network equipment

to help to understand their function.

E A traditional NOC (career) with its

shift hours and somewhat repetitive

nature of the tasks performed suffers

in comparison to more desirable,

high-paying jobs.

1213 Innsbruck Drive

Sunnyvale, CA 94089

All trademarks and registered trademarks are properties of their respective holders. This document is for planning purposes only and is not intended to modify or supplement any specifications orwarranties relating to Lucent Technologies products or services. ©2000 Lucent Technologies Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in U.S.A.Lucent Technologies Inc. Marketing Communications 7277 DMC 0101

Bulk RateUS Postage

PAIDPermit No.426Sunnyvale, CA

Methodology

This survey was conducted over the World

Wide Web from November 6 through

December 11, 2000 at:

http://www.lucentservices.com/surveys

All Web survey responses were automat-

ically collected into a survey tool. Any

questions skipped or incorrectly answered

by survey respondents were not included

in the tabulations. Not-applicable responses

were also excluded in the tabulations.

Each chart includes the number of valid

responses for that particular question (e.g.,

N=100 indicates 100 responses). Percent-

ages shown in charts may not equal 100%

due to rounding.

For additional information, please contact your Lucent Technologies Sales Representative oryour Lucent Advantage Reseller. You can also visit our web site at www.lucentservices.comor call 1-888-4-LUCENT in the U.S. or 1-650-318-1020 outside the U.S.

network operations centers - redes de computadores e ...penta2.ufrgs.br/tutorials/qos/noc01.pdf ·...

Documents